asgard aviation (formerly team 2)
DESCRIPTION
Logan Waddell Morgan Buchanan Erik Susemichel Aaron Foster. Asgard Aviation (formerly team 2). Craig Wikert Adam Ata Li Tan Matt Haas. Outline. Mission Statement Market and Customers Market size Customer Benefits / Needs Competition Concept of Operations Representative City Pairs - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
ASGARD AVIATION(FORMERLY TEAM 2)
Logan WaddellMorgan BuchananErik SusemichelAaron Foster
Craig WikertAdam AtaLi TanMatt Haas
1
2
OutlineI. Mission StatementII. Market and Customers
a. Market sizeb. Customer Benefits / Needs
III. CompetitionIV. Concept of Operations
a. Representative City Pairsb. Payload / Capacityc. Design Mission
V. System Design Requirementsa. Design Requirementsb. Benchmarking
VI. Technologies / Advanced ConceptsVII. Initial Sizing
3
Mission Statement To design an environmentally responsible aircraft
that sufficiently completes the “N+2” requirements for the NASA green aviation challenge.
“N+2” Goals○ Burn 50% less fuel burn○ Cumulative -42 dB noise reduction (Approach, Landing, Taxi)○ 75% reduction in LTO nitrogen oxide emissions
4
Customer Needs / Benefits
NASA○ “N+2” goals
Airlines
General PublicAirport Noise levels
5
Market / Customers
*Boeing
• Twin Aisle - Value ($B) ~3,600
• Twin Aisle – 7,100 new airplanes
• Boeing projects the worlds fleet to double by 2029
6
Market / Customers
*Boeing
• Steady increase in RPK since 1977, ~ 5% annually
• Largest Markets: Asia-Pacific, North America, Europe
7
Competition Similar size aircraft:
○ Boeing 767-300, 757-300, 787○ Airbus A330-200
High speed rail○ Bullet trains
Boeing 757 and 767
8
CONOPS - City Pairs Mission design represents popular routes Examples Routes Great Circle Distance Passengers /
Year ____________________________(nm)__________________________
Domestic range requirement of 3200 nm based on: MIA to SEA facing 65 kts headwind FAR Reserves
London New York 2999 1609337Miami Seattle 2363 N/ANew York San Francisco 2224 909514Los Angeles New York 2145 1697593Miami New York 948 955838Atlanta New York 659 935265Chicago New York 641 1182326Las Vegas Los Angeles 205 924732Boston New York 162 988976
9
Runway Length
*MIT
Airport Runway lengths (ft)
JFK 14572
ORD 13001
LAX 12091
SFO 11870
LHR 12799
LAS 14510
MIA 13000
ATL 11890
BOS 10083
SEA 11900
10
Aircraft Payload / Passenger Capacity 250 Passengers 180 lb/passenger Baggage 50 lb/passenger On board Baggage 15 lb/passenger
7 Crew Members 180 lb/crew Baggage 30 lb/crew
Wpayload = 61250 lbs
Wcrew = 1470 lbs
11
Design Mission
12
Typical Operating Mission
Typical Design Missions
Aircraft Qualities Aircraft Limitations Typical Design Mission
Range 4,000 nm 750 nm
City Pairs Seattle to Miami Chicago to New York
Passengers 250 212
Cruise Altitude 35,000 ft 30,000 ft
Reserve Segments 200 nm 100 nm
Takeoff Weight 268,000 lbs 243,100 lbs
Mach Number 0.8 0.8
13
Design RequirementsCompliance Matrix
Requirement Unit Target Threshold Current
Range naut. miles 4000 3600 -
Payload pax 250 230 250
Cruise Mach # - 0.8 0.76 0.8
Runway Length (Takeoff) ft 7000 9000 -
Runway Length (Landing) ft 6000 6500 -
Emissions g/kN thrust 15 22 -
Noise (Cum.) dB -42 -32 -
Fuel Burn (SFC)-Cruise lb/(lbs*hr) 0.3 0.45 -
14
Design RequirementsNoise
(below stage 4)-42 dB
LTO NOx Emissions
(below CAEP 6)
-75%
Performance: Aircraft Fuel
Burn
-50%
Performance:Field Length
-50%
ERA N+2 Requirements
Noise prediction/reduction technologies for airframe/propulsion systems
Emissions-reduction technologies (mainly NOx)
Alternative Fuel Usage Improved vehicle
performance from: Lightweight, durable structures High-lift aerodynamics Higher bypass ratio engines
NASA Subsonic Fixed Wing Project Goals:
15
Benchmarking
Max Passenge
rs OEW (lb)Max Takeoff Weight (lb)
Max Payload (lb)
Usable Fuel (lb)
Cruise Mach #
Max Field Length (ft)
Max Range (nmi)
Boeing 757-200PF 279 142,350 270,000 38,200 79,980 0.80 13,500 4,750
Boeing 767-200ER 255 181,610 395,000 78,500 161,738 0.80 13,000 6,385
Boeing 777-200LR 301 320,000 766,000 141,000 320,863 0.84 14,000 9,395
Airbus A321-200 220 103,527 187,393 54,000 51,370 0.79 15,000 3,200
Airbus A330-200 380 264,845 480,607 115,012 97,530 0.82 15,000 7,250
•Info on Boeing aircraft from boeing.com•Info on Airbus aircraft from airbus.com
16
Technologies/Advanced Concepts Fuel Burn
Spiroid winglets Advanced engine
concepts Noise
Landing gear Emissions
Less fuel burn
17
Technologies/Advanced concepts Winglets
○ Blended
○ Spiroid
○ Multi-Winglets
18
Geared Turbofan Engine Pratt & Whitney currently has a line of geared
turbofan engines called the PurePower family. Developing advanced GTF for Airbus and Boeing next gen narrow body replacement aircraft.
Geared Turbofan allows fan to operate at lower speeds while compressor and turbine operate at high speeds.
Provides 12%-15% improvement in fuel burn range, 50% NOx emissions reduction, and 20 dB decrease from CAEP noise standards
19
Affordable Large Integrated Structures Eliminates structural discontinuities and
fastened assemblies Reduction in part count Lower manufacturing time and cost
Northrop Grumman
20
Landing Gear Fairings Reduces the noise in the mid and high
frequency domain compared to the plain landing gear configuration up to 4.5 dB
Reduces vortex shedding due to bluff-body nature of nose and main landing gear
Northrop Grumman
Hybrid Laminar Flow Control
21
•Active drag reduction technique•Design of the suction surface •Chambers underneath the perforated skin •Applied to the vertical and horizontal tail reduces drag by 1%
*Clean Sky
22
Composite Materials Lighter weight
○ High strength to weight ratio○ Reduction of overall weight 20% or more
Stronger ○ Graphite/epoxy composite○ Greater resistance to damage from cyclic loading
Hybrid○ Addition of fiberglass or kevlar ○ Creates greater fatigue toughness○ Impact resistance
23
Sizing•Using MATLAB to create a comprehensive sizing code based on first order method from Raymer text
•Empty weight prediction based off of Raymer database (Table 3.1)
• Equation Used: We/W0=A*W0C*Kvs
•Fuel weight prediction based on drag and fuel burn predictions
• Climb, Landing, Warmup and Takeoff fractions used historical data• Cruise fraction used Breguet range equation:
• exp(-R*C/(V*L/D))• Loiter fraction used endurance equation:
• exp(-E*C/(L/D))•L/D prediction
• Equation Used: L/D = 1.4*AR+7.1
24
Aircraft DatabasePublished Information (from Jane’s All the Worlds Aircraft and Boeing.com)
Boeing 767-200ER Airbus A330-200
Range 6,545 [nmi] 6,750 [nmi]
Takeoff Gross Weight 395,000 [lb] 507,050 [lb]
Empty Weight (OWE) 184,400 [lb] 263,075 [lb]
Fuel Weight 159,920 [lb] 186,255 [lb]
Total Fuel capacity 23,980 [gal] 36,750 [gal]
Boeing 767-200ER Airbus A330-200
25
Sizing Code Predictions
Actual Prediction % Error
Gross Takeoff Weight
395,000 [lb] 408,264 [lb] 3.35
Empty Weight Fraction
.46684 .4698 0.63
L/D (cruise)
18 18.3 2.22
Actual Prediction % Error
Gross Takeoff Weight
507,050 [lb] 365,624 [lb] -27.89
Empty Weight Fraction
.51883 .47295 -8.80
L/D (cruise)
N/A N/A N/A
Boeing 767-200ER Airbus A330-200
•The initial sizing calculations prove to be mostly accurate on both of the baseline aircraft
26
Our Design PredictionsPrediction
Gross Takeoff Weight 267,365 [lb]
Empty Weight 128,848 [lb]
Empty Weight Fraction .48192
27
Summary and Next Steps Finalizing the sizing code Including the new technologies into the
sizing Constructing a preliminary CAD
geometry for the aircraft
28
References
Boeing http://www.boeing.com
Airbus
http://www.airbus.com NASA
www.aeronautics.nasa.gov/isrp/era/index.htm
MIT
http://aviationweek.typepad.com/files/mit_n3_final_presentation.pdf
Northrop Grumman
http://aviationweek.typepad.com/files/northrop_grumman_final.pdf
Aviation Week
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/commercial/
Perforated Fairings for Landing Gear Noise Control , N. Molin
http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/43011/1/paper_vancouver_noabsolute_small.pdf